Laparoscopic splenectomy: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

Background Although laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) has become the standard approach for most splenectomy cases, some areas still remain controversial. To date, the indications that preclude laparoscopic splenectomy are not clearly defined. In view of this, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has developed clinical practice guidelines for LS. Methods An international expert panel was invited to appraise the current literature and to develop evidence-based recommendations. A consensus development conference using a nominal group process convened in May 2007. Its recommendations were presented at the annual EAES congress in Athens, Greece, on 5 July 2007 for discussion and further input. After a further Delphi process between the experts, the final recommendations were agreed upon. Results Laparoscopic splenectomy is indicated for most benign and malignant hematologic diseases independently of the patient’s age and body weight. Preoperative investigation is recommended for obtaining information on spleen size and volume as well as the presence of accessory splenic tissue. Preoperative vaccination against meningococcal, pneumococcal, and Haemophilus influenzae type B infections is recommended in elective cases. Perioperative anticoagulant prophylaxis with subcutaneous heparin should be administered to all patients and prolonged anticoagulant prophylaxis to high-risk patients. The choice of approach (supine [anterior], semilateral or lateral) is left to the surgeon’s preference and concomitant conditions. In cases of massive splenomegaly, the hand-assisted technique should be considered to avoid conversion to open surgery and to reduce complication rates. The expert panel still considered portal hypertension and major medical comorbidities as contraindications to LS. Conclusion Despite a lack of level 1 evidence, LS is a safe and advantageous procedure in experienced hands that has displaced open surgery for almost all indications. To support the clinical evidence, further randomized controlled trials on different issues are mandatory.     

Port Site Metastasis of Sigmoid Colon Cancer After a Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy: Report of a Case

A 75-year-old woman with TNM stage I (T2, N0, M0) sigmoid colon adenocarcinoma underwent a laparoscopy-assisted sigmoidectomy. Five months later, the patient developed two subcutaneous metastases at two trocar sites. A second operation was performed and two abdominal wall masses were resected, but the operation revealed no evidence of peritoneal dissemination, liver metastasis, or lymph node metastasis. The histological findings confirmed the diagnosis of metastatic carcinoma of the sigmoid colon. Large-scale studies have shown the actual rate of port site metastasis to be similar to that observed in open surgery, and therefore the rate is much lower than that initially reported in small studies. However, the metastatic mechanism has not yet been clarified. These results suggest that port site metastasis can be prevented as effectively as during open surgery by utilizing accurate operating skills based on the sound principles of tumor surgery. Therefore, it is very important that appropriate operating procedures and an effective training system are established. Received: April 19, 2002 / Accepted: September 3, 2002 Reprint requests to: O. Itano     

Laparoscopic resection of curable colon and rectal cancer: an evidence-based review

The initial enthusiastic application of laparoscopic techniques to colorectal surgical procedures was tempered in the early 1990s by reports of tumor implants in the laparoscopic incisions. Substantial evidence has accumulated, including evidence from randomized controlled trials, to support that laparoscopic resection results in oncologic outcomes similar to open resection, when performed by well-trained, experienced surgeons. This review was developed in conjunction with guidelines published by the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons. Data from the surgical literature concerning laparoscopic resection of curable colorectal cancer was evaluated regarding diagnostic evaluation, preoperative preparation, operative techniques, prevention of tumor implants, and training and experience. Recommendations are accompanied by an assessment of the level of supporting evidence available at the time of the development of the guidelines.     

Oncologic outcomes after resection of rectal cancer: Laparoscopic versus open approach

Background

This study examined outcomes of laparoscopic and open rectal cancer surgery in a community hospital setting.

Methods

A community health care system cancer registry was reviewed retrospectively (2004-2007) for rectal cancer patients undergoing surgical treatment. Primary end points were rates of recurrence and survival.

Results

Both open and laparoscopic resection groups had similar demographic, treatment, and tumor characteristics. Most patients in the open resection and laparoscopic resection populations experienced no recurrence (79% vs 83%, respectively; P = .5). Overall, the groups had similar mean (88% vs 96%, respectively; P = .4) and disease-free (21 and 23 months, respectively; P = .5) survival.

Conclusions

In a community hospital setting, laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer was found to be as safe and effective as open resection in selected patients.     

Obesity surgery: Evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

Background The increasing prevalence of morbid obesity together with the development of laparoscopic approaches has led to a steep rise in the number of bariatric operations. These guidelines intend to define the comparative effectivness and surrounding circumstances of the various types of obesity surgery.Methods A consensus panel representing the fields of general/endoscopic surgery, nutrition and epidemiology convened to agree on specific questions in obesity surgery. Databases were systematically searched for clinical trial results in order to produce evidence-based recommendations. Following two days of discussion by the experts and a plenary discussion, the final statements were issued.Recommendations After the patients multidisciplinary evaluation, obesity surgery should be considered in adults with a documented BMI greater than or equal to 35 and related comorbidity, or a BMI of at least 40. In addition to standard laboratory testing, chest radiography, electrocardiography, spirometry, and abdominal ultrasonography, the preoperative evaluation of obesity surgery patients also includes upper gastrointestinal endoscopy or radiologic evaluation with a barium meal. Psychiatric consultation and polysomnography can safely be restricted to patients with clinical symptoms on preoperative screening. Adjustable gastric banding (GB), vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and biliopancreatic diversion (BPD) are all effective in the treatment of morbid obesity, but differ in degree of weight loss and range of complications. The choice of procedure therefore should be tailored to the individual situation. There is evidence that a laparoscopic approach is advantageous for LAGB, VBG, and GB (and probably also for BPD). Antibiotic and antithromboembolic prophylaxis should be used routinely. Patients should be seen 3 to 8 times during the first postoperative year, 1 to 4 times during the second year and once or twice a year thereafter. Outcome assessment after surgery should include weight loss and maintainance, nutritional status, comorbidities and quality-of-life.Presented at the 12th International Congress of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (E.A.E.S.), Barcelona, Spain, 9-12 June 2004     

Laparoscopic extraperitoneal rectal cancer surgery: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

Background

The laparoscopic approach is increasingly applied in colorectal surgery. Although laparoscopic surgery in colon cancer has been proved to be safe and feasible with equivalent long-term oncological outcome compared to open surgery, safety and long-term oncological outcome of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer remain controversial. Laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery might be efficacious, but indications and limitations are not clearly defined. Therefore, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has developed this clinical practice guideline.

Methods

An international expert panel was invited to appraise the current literature and to develop evidence-based recommendations. The expert panel constituted for a consensus development conference in May 2010. Thereafter, the recommendations were presented at the annual congress of the EAES in Geneva in June 2010 in a plenary session. A second consensus process (Delphi process) of the recommendations with the explanatory text was necessary due to the changes after the consensus conference.

Results

Laparoscopic surgery for extraperitoneal (mid- and low-) rectal cancer is feasible and widely accepted. The laparoscopic approach must offer the same quality of surgical specimen as in open surgery. Short-term outcomes such as bowel function, surgical-site infections, pain and hospital stay are slightly improved with the laparoscopic approach. Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer is not inferior to the open in terms of disease-free survival, overall survival or local recurrence. Laparoscopic pelvic dissection may impair genitourinary and sexual function after rectal resection, like in open surgery.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic surgery for mid- and low-rectal cancer can be recommended under optimal conditions. Still, most level 1 evidence is for colon cancer surgery rather than rectal cancer. Upcoming results from large randomised trials are awaited to strengthen the evidence for improved short-term results and equal long-term results in comparison with the open approach.     

Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: Outcomes in 194 patients and review of the literature

Background There are few reports on laparoscopic rectum resection demonstrating its feasibility and efficacy in patients with rectal cancer. Most patient series are small, and results must be considered preliminary and medium-term. Our large prospective conducted study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a totally laparoscopic resection for rectum carcinoma with emphasis on perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes.Methods Between November 1992 and July 2003, 194 unselected patients were resected laparoscopically for rectal carcinoma. Patients with locally advanced rectum carcinoma (uT3/uT4) and no evidence of distant metastases were candidates for neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Adjuvant treatment was administered to patients with UICC stage II/III disease. All patients were followed up prospectively to evaluate complications and late outcomes. Survival probability analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Study selection was made by Medline search using the following key words: rectal cancer, rectal neoplasms, laparoscopy, and resection. Single case reports and abstracts were excluded. When surgical series were reported more than once, only the most recent reports were considered and listed.Results The most common procedures were low anterior resection with total mesorectum excision in 65.5% of patients and high anterior resection in 25.3%. Average operative time was 174 min. Average number of lymph nodes removed was 25.4 and length of specimen resected was 27.6 cm. Resection was curative in 145 patients and palliative in 49 cases. UICC tumor stages were as follows: stage I: 25.2%, stage II: 27.3%, stage III: 30.4%, and stage IV: 17%. Intraoperative complications were <1% for lesions of the ureter, urinary bladder, and deferent duct. Conversion to conventional surgery was necessary in two cases (1%). The most common postoperative complication was anastomotic leakage in 13.5% of patients. There was no postoperative mortality. Follow-up evaluation ranged from 1 to 128 months with a mean of 46.1 months. The most common late complication was incisional hernia in 3.6% of patients. Port-site metastases occurred in one patient (0.5%). Tumor recurrence developed in 23 of the 145 curative resected patients (11.7% distant metastases and 4.1% local recurrence). Overall local recurrence rate was 6.7% (4.1% after curative resection and 14.3% after palliative resection). Overall survival rate was 90.6% at 1 year, 74.5% at 3 years, and 66.3% at 5 years. Overall 5-year survival rate was 76.9% after curative resection and 31.8% after palliative resection. Cancer-related survival rate was 94% at 1 year, 82.4% at 3 years, and 78.9% at 5 years. At 5 years it was 87.7% after curative resection and 48.5% after palliative resection. At 5 years, the survival rate was 100% for stage I, 94.4% for stage II, 66.6% for stage III, and 44.6% for stage IV.Conclusions Our results and the literature review clearly demonstrate that laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer is not associated with higher morbidity and mortality. Established oncological and surgical principles are respected and long-term outcomes are at least as good as those after open surgery.Presented by T. Benhidjeb at the 12^th International Congress of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (E.A.E.S.), Barcelona, Spain, June 2004     

Prevention and treatment of bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

Background

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures in Europe (and the world) and has become the standard procedure for the management of symptomatic cholelithiasis or acute cholecystitis in patients without specific contraindications. Bile duct injuries (BDI) are rare but serious complications that can occur during a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Prevention and management of BDI has given rise to a host of publications but very few recommendations, especially in Europe.

Methods

A systematic research of the literature was performed. An international expert panel was invited to appraise the current literature and to develop evidence-based recommendations. Statements and recommendations were drafted after a consensus development conference in May 2011, followed by presentation and discussion at the annual congress of the EAES held in Torino in June 2011. Finally, full guidelines were consented and adopted by the expert panel via e-mail and web conference.

Results

A total of 1,765 publications were identified through the systematic literature search and additional submission by panellists; 671 publications were selected as potentially relevant. Only 46 publications fulfilled minimal methodological criteria to support Clinical Practice Guidelines recommendations. Because the level of evidence was low for most of the studies, most statements or recommendations had to be based on consensus of opinion among the panel members. A total of 15 statements and recommendations were developed covering the following topics: classification of injuries, epidemiology, prevention, diagnosis, and management of BDI.

Conclusions

Because BDI is a rare event, it is difficult to generate evidence for prevention, diagnosis, or the management of BDI from clinical studies. Nevertheless, the panel has formulated recommendations. Due to the currently limited evidence, a European registry should be considered to collect and analyze more valid data on BDI upon which recommendations can be based.     

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in the management of large colo-rectal polyps

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopic polypectomy plays a major role in preventing colo-rectal cancer. However, resection of sessile, broad-based pedunculated and flat lesions carries a high risk of perforation. Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) may significantly reduce this risk. We aim to assess the safety and efficacy of EMR in our unit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A review of a prospective database over a 3-year period identified 87 patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy for polyps in sizes from 10 to 50 mm, performed by two experienced endoscopists. A total of 33 EMRs were performed on 30 lesions in 24 of these patients. RESULTS: Median size of lesions was 20 mm. Most were located in the rectum and sigmoid. 22 lesions were resected en-bloc while 8 were resected piecemeal. Histologically these lesions were predominantly adenomatous polyps. An incidental focus of adenocarcinoma was found in 7 lesions. Histologically complete excision was achieved in 10 lesions. Although histological completeness of excision was not confirmed in 19 lesions, repeat colonoscopy confirmed successful excision. Only one lesion was incompletely excised requiring surgical resection. Bleeding occurred during 2 EMRs, both times successfully controlled by further injection of adrenaline locally. There was no case of bowel perforation. Further surveillance colonoscopy was performed according to established guidelines. Median follow-up period was 21 months. None of the patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma showed any evidence of recurrence. CONCLUSION: Within our unit endoscopic mucosal resection appeared to be safe and effective procedure for resecting large colorectal polyps not suitable for conventional polypectomy. This data would support prompt referral of lesions fulfilling these criteria to specialist units offering this service to avoid unnecessary surgery.     

完全腹腔镜下进展期远端胃癌根治术的临床体会(附26例报道)

目的总结完全腹腔镜下进展期胃癌根治术的临床体会。方法回顾性分析我科2005年8月至2010年5月期间对26例进展期胃癌患者行完全腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术的临床资料。结果所有患者均成功在腹腔镜下完成整个手术,无中转开腹。手术时间为270~450 min,(283.2±27.6)min;术中出血为80~350 ml,(178.4±67.4)ml。术后患者胃肠功能恢复时间为2~4 d,(2.8±1.2)d;下床活动时间为1~3 d,(1.5±0.4)d;进流质饮食时间为3~4 d,(3.5±1.4)d;术后住院时间为7~13 d,(10.0±2.6)d。清扫淋巴结为11~34枚,(17.8±7.3)枚。所有病例切缘均为阴性,近端切缘与肿瘤距离为5~12 cm,(7.0±2.1)cm;远端切缘与肿瘤距离为4~8 cm,(5.5±1.8)cm。术后所有患者均获随访,时间为3~48个月,平均18.5个月,2例低分化腺癌患者分别于术后13和18个月复发并转移死亡,其余患者未发现复发、转移。结论完全腹腔镜下远端胃癌根治术是安全、可行的,但其优越性相对于开腹手术尚需大量的临床资料来证明。     

Portal Vein Resection in Surgery for Cancer of Biliary Tract and Pancreas: Special Reference to the Relationship Between the Surgical Outcome and Site of Primary Tumor

Background Early and late outcomes after superior mesenteric-portal vein resection (VR) combined with pancreaticoduodenectomy, major hepatectomy, or both for pancreaticobiliary carcinoma were retrospectively evaluated. VR is the most frequently used vascular procedure in this field, but an exact role of VR has not been compared according to the primary site of tumor. Materials and Methods Postoperative outcomes were compared between surgery with and without VR in each of the three disease-based groups: hilar cholangiocarcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with hilar extension (HIC, 56), middle and distal cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma (DGC, 118), and pancreatic head adenocarcinoma (PHC, 77). Results VR was performed in 19.6% of HIC, 8.5% of DGC, and 45.5% of PHC. In-hospital death was 7.1% (4 of 56) patients with VR (3 of DGC and 1 of PHC). Operations with VR in DGC showed a larger amount of blood loss and more increased ratio of R1operation than those with no VR. In HIC, DGC, and PHC, median survival time of patients with VR was 37, 6.8, and 20 months and that of patients without VR was 42.9, 28.6, and 20.3 months, respectively. VR did not affect survival either in HIC or in PHC; however, in DGC, VR was accompanied with dismal outcome compared with no VR (p = 0.001). Conclusions Aggressive surgery with VR can be justified both in HIC and in PHC but should not be recommended for DGC. Surgical outcomes of VR differed considerably, depending on the sites of the primary tumor.     

Can the results of anorectal (abdominoperineal) resection be improved: are circumferential resection margins too often positive?

Carefully executed surgery for rectal cancer has reduced the incidence of local recurrence after restorative resection. Three recent large prospective series have confirmed the perception of a higher positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) rate after abdominoperineal resection. Tumour spread is different for low tumours and the surgical technique of abdominoperineal resection, perhaps better known as anorectal excision, may vary between surgeons. There is a need to redefine the place of anorectal excision and the contribution that can be made by pre-operative chemoradiation and/or extended surgery to reduce local recurrence and increase survival. Defined surgery, validated by histopathological assessment, as applied to TME surgery, would determine whether the perceived higher rates are due to the differences in routes of tumour spread or to surgically related variables. Unnecessary R1 or R2 resections and operative perforation can be minimized by an understanding of the surgical anatomy, the pattern of spread and difference in operative technique between anorectal excision and a low restorative operation. Surgical technique to maximize R0 resection should be based on a detailed understanding of the pelvic fascia and the levator ani and the use of pre-operative imaging to define lines of excision. With the adoption of even lower restorative resection (intersphincteric) there is a need to reassess the method of anorectal excision. This may be achieved by histopathological assessment of CRM positivity and MDT audit to improve results. Clinical trials are essential.     

The application of a new stapling device for open surgery (ContourTM Curved Cutter Stapler) in the laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer

Anastomotic leakage is a serious problem in the laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer. Although stapling devices and techniques for colorectal or coloanal anastomosis have been improved, laparoscopic anastomosis is still technically difficult and the rate of leakage is high. To resolve this problem, a new stapling device (the Contour^TM Curved Cutter Stapler) for open surgery was applied to the laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer. After intracorporeal mobilization and vessel ligation, a 6-cm Pfannenstiel incision was made to insert the device into the peritoneal cavity, and a hand access device was placed on the site. The head of the device was put through a cutoff of the middle finger of a surgical glove, after which the wrist of the glove was attached to the hand access device. To prevent leakage of CO₂ gas through the gap between the shaft and the glove, the shaft covered by the glove was tied, and the gap was filled with bone wax. After re-creation of the pneumoperitoneum, the rectum was transected with the stapling device, and the anastomosis was accomplished by the double stapling technique. This technique enabled a reliable transection of the rectum because of the easy handling of the device and the wide laparoscopic view of the lower rectum in the deep pelvis.     

CO2气腹对中老年直肠癌行腹腔镜手术患者呼吸和循环系统的影响

摘要为保证中老年直肠癌腹腔镜手术的安全,观测CO2气腹对呼吸和循环系统的影响,选择50例中老年择期行直肠癌腹腔镜手术患者,术中采用气管插管静脉复合结合连续硬膜外麻醉。行腹腔镜手术时,监测心率（HR）、平均动脉血压（MAP）、心电图（ECG）、呼吸频率（RR）、潮气量（VT）、气道压力（PAw）、血氧饱和度（SPO2）、呼气末二氧化碳分压（PetCO2）、动脉血氧分压（PaO2）、动脉二氧化碳分压（PaCO2）。结果显示,患者行CO2气腹前各项指标均在正常范围,CO2气腹后5min、15min的HR增快,MAP、PAw、PETCO2、PaCO2均升高。结果表明,CO2气腹对中老年直肠癌腹腔镜手术者呼吸、循环系统影响很大,因此,术中必须严密监测,备好抢救药品,对中老年合并心肺疾病者更应注意。